Weitere Kapitel dieses Buchs durch Wischen aufrufen
Digital musical instruments (DMIs) rarely feature a clear, causal relationship between the performer’s actions and the sounds produced. Instead, they often function simply as controllers, triggering sounds that are or have been synthesised elsewhere; they are not necessarily sources of sound in themselves (Miranda and Wanderley 2006). Consequently, the performer’s physical interaction with the device frequently does not appear to correlate directly with the sonic output, thus making it difficult for spectators to discern how gestures and actions are translated into sounds. This relationship between input and output is determined by the mapping, the term for the process of establishing relationships of cause and effect between the control and sound generation elements of the instrument (Hunt et al. 2003). While there has been much consideration of the creative and expressive potential of mapping from the perspective of the performer and/or instrument designer, there has been little focus on the experience of those receiving DMIs. How do spectators respond to the perceptual challenge DMIs present them? What influence do mapping and other aspects of instrument design (e.g. the type of controller used and the sound design) have on the success of an instrument when considered from the spectator’s point of view? And to what extent can (and should) this area of artistic exploration be made more accessible to audiences? This article aims to consider these questions through providing a critical review of the existing theoretical and empirical work on DMI reception.
Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten
Sie möchten Zugang zu diesem Inhalt erhalten? Dann informieren Sie sich jetzt über unsere Produkte:
Auslander, P. (1999). Liveness: Performance in a mediatized culture. London and New York: Routledge.
Auslander, P. (2009). Lucille meets Guitarbot: Instrumentality, agency, and technology in musical performance. Theatre Journal,61(4), 603–616. doi: 10.1353/tj.0.0277
Barbosa, J., Calegario, F., Teichrieb, V., Ramalho, G., & McGlynn, P. (2012). Considering audiences’ view towards an evaluation methodology for digital musical instruments. In NIME 2012: Proceedings of the 12thInternational Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (pp. 403–408). Ann Arbor, MI. Retrieved from http://www.nime.org/proceedings/2012/nime2012_174.pdf
Berthaut, F., Marshall, M., Subramanian, S., & Hachet, M. (2013). Rouages: Revealing the mechanisms of digital musical instruments to the audience. In NIME 2013: Proceedings of the International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (pp. 165–169). Daejeon, South Korea. Retrieved from http://nime.org/proceedings/2013/nime2013_51.pdf
Berthaut, F., Coyle D., Moore, J. W., & Limerick, H. (2015). Liveness through the lens of agency and causality liveness through the lens of agency and causality. In NIME 2015: Proceedings of Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (pp. 382–386). Baton Rouge, LA. Retrieved from http://www.nime.org/proceedings/2015/nime2015_272.pdf
Emerson, G., Förstel, G., & Egermann, H. (in revision). Gesture-sound causality from the audience’s perspective: Investigating the influence of mapping perceptibility on the aesthetic perception of new digital musical instruments. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity and the Arts.
Fyans, A. C., Gurevich, M., & Stapleton, P. (2010). Examining the spectator experience. In NIME 2010: Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (pp. 451–454). Sydney, Australia. Retrieved from http://www.nime.org/proceedings/2010/nime2010_451.pdf
Fyans, A. C., & Gurevich, M. (2011). Perceptions of skill in performances with acoustic and electronic instruments. In NIME 2011: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on New Interfaces for Musical Expression (pp. 495–498). Oslo, Norway. Retrieved from http://www.nime.org/proceedings/2011/nime2011_495.pdf
Hunt, A., Wanderley, M., & Paradis, M. (2003). The importance of parameter mapping in electronic instrument design. Journal of New Music Research, 32(4), 429–440. doi: 10.1076/jnmr.32.4.429.18853
Leder, H., Belke, B., Oeberst, A., & Augustin, D. (2004). A model of aesthetic appreciation and aesthetic judgments. British Journal of Psychology,95(4), 489–508. CrossRef
Miranda, E. R., & Wanderley, M. M. (2006). New Digital Musical Instruments: Control and Interaction Beyond the Keyboard (Vol. 21). Computer Music and Digital Audio Series. Middleton: AR Editions.
O’Modhrain, S. 2011. A framework for the evaluation of digital musical instruments. Computer Music Journal, 35(1), 28–42. doi: 10.1162/COMJ_a_00038
Schloss, W. A. (2003). Using contemporary technology in live performance: The dilemma of the performer. Journal of New Music Research, 32(3): 239–242. doi: 10.1076/jnmr.22.214.171.12466
- Mapping, Causality and the Perception of Instrumentality: Theoretical and Empirical Approaches to the Audience’s Experience of Digital Musical Instruments
- Springer Singapore